The state chronicle. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1883-1893, 1887-09-01
THE FARMERS ALLIANCE.
REV. ID. p. MEACHAM FIRES THE
LAST SHOT.
This Closes the Controversy and we An
nOunce our Columns Closed to Any
thing More on this Line.

Ih's Closes the Controversy and we AM
nounce our Columns Closed to Any
thing More on this Line.
Especial Cor. STATE CHRONICLE
RALEIGH, N. c., Aug. 30, 1Ss7.-In the
CHRONICLE of August 18th appeared an
article from correspondent at Laurin-
burg, over the initial letters sd T H.. y
purpOrting to be an answer to d. p Mea-
cham, who was born on Mountain Greek
IN Richmond county, fifty years ago, and
VINO took occasion to reply to former ar
ticie from ''D. I. H., assailing an orgap-
zation known as the Farmers Alliance.
If I'D. T. H. had confined himself to
the subject in controversy, and not gone
out of his way to show that we were a
"rovlng Imaginary character, being near
Raleigh and on Mountain Greek at the
same time" then his honesty of purpose
would have been more manifest. He should
not forget that the people for whom he
| processes TO write are not all fools and that
a resort to such quibling betravs the weak
ness of his position. His complaint at the
manner in which he was handled in nv
article, ! regard as dodge. He assailed
the Farmers Alliance, and in SO IN my
words, said it was antagonistic to "other
interests and industries" :" This we think
we controverted, at least his silence on
that point in his promised answer would
lead US to believe SO,
There was so much of I'D. T. H. and
so little argument in his article that we
| felt constrained to fire at the most con
spicuous object. but the loud braying long
ears, and no antlers on our game convin-
ces US of our mistakeC0. He must have
! found himself in a sad dilemma when in
| order to conceal his desire to provoke a
! quarrel, he asserts that our article con
! talned threats at him. the most chari,a-
bic view we can take of this violence to
truth, is that he did not INTEND to say we
used threats. Let us admit that it was
| the ''printer's devil that said that If
I'D. 1. H. had been as mindful of the eff
! fectS of ''thrusts' when he penncd his first
| article as when he wrote his second, it
might have saved him the trouble OF writ
ing such words as 'swashbucl,ler, refined
ruf1ianism, &c, as applied 70 his compet-
itors. We hope by this time he has learn
ed that farmers can, when occasion re
| quires it, use such verbal edge-t00l as
we'll as ''Laurlnburg mechanics"
| We now come to that part of his article
which he calls discussion of the merits
of the Fame Alliance He says: THE
success of any moral system depends en-
tlrely upon the applicability of its princi
| pies to the common interests Of those con
cerned." Now if this proposition be true
! (and we will not now deny it,, how will
ID. I. H.. reconcile it with that empha-
sized declaration Of his IN the CHRONICLE
of the 1th inst, in his reply to ''Farmer," ."
where he says, 1.-The present SYSTEMS OF
BUSINESS have reduced the agricultural in
| terest IN North Carolina to a state abSO-
| lutely deplOrabe." The present systems
of business are moral systems, their prin-
ciples are applicable to the common inter
| est of those concerned, the farming inter
ests are concerned, and under these sys-
| TENS I'D T. II. says the agricultural in
| terests have been reduced to a state that
is absolutely deplorable," hence ''the sue
cess of any moral system does not depend
upon the applicability of its principles to
the common interests of those concerned
| for these systems have succeeded. I'D. f.
h. did not discuss this proposition at ALL
| the reason is obvious, he could not reach
his conclusions from it.
Then he makes another leap, still strug-
Cling for some pretoXt 10 Justify himself in
abusing thing that does not concern him
| or the public in the least. He says, as IA
second proposition, ''when a man or an
organized body of men comes before the
public, with an idea or an object, and
asks for public favor" &c. This is his
proposition and does not apply to the case.
! His conclusions are not drawn from it, as
he admits, but from personal investiga-
tiOn of the secret working of the Alliance.
| Then his second proposition will not do,
! for the Alliance does not come before the
public nor does it ask public favor SO
far from it that the very absence of such
thing furnishes I'D. T. H." with his only
preteXt for assalin. it. That 'generous
public to which he so plaintively appeals
| is a living witness to the fact that his
-Ec1D al1a Ln +;
because of its secrecy, His conclusions
drawn from either of the above PROPOSE
| tions.
But what are his conclusiOnsl "Why,
that it will never succeed" And why will
it never sucoeedf His answer is, because
it is controlled by IL few of the most sell
fish men in his knowledge" And who are
the selfish bourbons? He writes one man S
name and then says ''he is nice gentle
man. Did he not suppose the generous
enlightened public" to whom he appealed
would notice these inconsistencies? and
naturally enquire, which object he had
most in view, to discuss subject or abuse
somebody2 The latter appears to be his
real object, but the generous enlightened
public" never appoint obscure itinerating
Intermediates to defend the best inter
ests of North Carolina. Therefore the ap
pointment must be self made. This may
account for his zeal to serve the appoint
ing power.
But again 90. T. H." says: 'He ex
amned into the workings of this new AL
lance, and could see no chance for its fina
success" Let the reader bear in mind that
he, sd. I. H." examined into the work
ings Of this secret Alliance, which, if We
mistake not, was in some dark corner with
doors guarded by two sentinels. Here the
funny part comes in if it is secret, as he
says, with doors guarded with two senti
neis, what part did he examine? Now lei
us all taught! The generous enlightened
public" must not question the report O
this guardian of the best interests of Nortl
Carolina. cit is secret order, with doors
guarded by two sentinels," and yet sd. T
H." examined its workings.
Are we to be afflicted with another vol
ume of the ''Fool's Errand" with I'D. 7
H." for it's hero? I'D T. L." either examined
the workings of the Alliance in order t.
reach his conclusion or he did not; if h
did, he must have joined it; if he joine'
it, he was received on profession of goot
faith, and that profession was either sin
r cere or hypocritical, if sincere he woult
have kept his pledge, if only pretended
then he is an imposter and not to be be
lieved. The Alliance does not want al
enemy. The generous enlightened pub
lie" will not own an impostor.
With regard to his quotation from tn
Al